The Intelligence Reachback Conundrum By Adam Maisel, Modern War Institute: “In 2016, US Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley called for greater reliance on smaller and leaner forward headquarters. Long a staple of the “long wars” in Afghanistan and Iraq, bloated brigade- and division-level commands became the norm, lulling a generation of Army soldiers into assuming the luxury of seemingly permanent, large headquarters in war zones would be the rule rather than the exception.”

The failed coup of July 15, 2016 has irreversibly transformed Turkish politics. Although the coup attempt was thankfully thwarted, the path that Erdogan chose to take after the coup—using the state of emergency powers he was given to go specifically after coup plotters, to embark instead on a much broader campaign against all dissidents, many of whom possessed no ties to the coup in any form—highlights an unfortunate truth about the country: Turkey is in a deep crisis.FEATURED COMMENTARY

Almost a century has passed since the Ottoman Empire was dismembered and Mustafa Kemal set out to build the modern Turkish state on its ruins. Twenty years ago, no one in the West would have called into question the achievement of the man who eventually, with considerable justice, styled himself Atatürk (“Father of the Turks”). But many now fear that the political and cultural revolution he instigated in the 1920s will be overturned and that Turkey will cease to function as normal nation state, turn on the West, and try to upend the existing order in the eastern Mediterranean, the Balkans, and the Middle East.

The phrase “the struggle for Turkey’s soul” once served as shorthand for the perceived conflict between the country’s secular democratic values and Muslim religious values. With the July 8, 2018 inauguration of Recep Tayyip Erdogan as Turkey’s President, democratic values and Muslim values now struggle with hyper-empowered Erdogan’s personal political goals and his devilish acquisition of authoritarian power.

Patrick Porter writes: Grand strategic change is possible. But it requires two interacting elements that come together rarely: a major strategic shock and a determined president willing to bear the costs of overhauling American security commitments. Trump provides us with a live experiment that tests the argument, or at least the proposition that short of a major shock and a committed agent of change, the existing strategy will endure. - War on the Rocks

The Strategy Delusion By Jeffrey W. Meiser & Sitara Nath, Strategy Bridge: “Strategy is a theory of success. If you do not have a theory of success, you do not have a strategy. If you do not have a strategy, you are unlikely to achieve your goals. These are straight-forward, and perhaps even obvious principles. However, judging from what passes as strategic analysis and strategic thought, these principles are not obvious; in fact, these principles are consistently violated.”

When the U.S. Missile Defense Agency was created in 2002, the expectation was that it would initially develop missile defense systems but then transfer responsibility for their procurement to the military services that would operate them. The process has not worked out quite as expected. - Defense News

Inside SecDef Jim Mattis’ $2.5 Billion Plan to Make the Infantry DeadlierBy Matthw Cox, Military.com: “The task force's mission isn't just about funding high-tech new equipment for Army, Marine and special operations close-combat forces. It is also digging into deeply entrenched policies and making changes to improve unit cohesion, leadership and even the methods used for selecting individuals who serve in close-combat formations.”

A Middle East Strategic AllianceBy Daniel Gallington, The Washington Times: “Perhaps most important — because it’s the Middle East — is what about Israel and the dynamics associated with the “Israeli relationship” — if any — with an organization such as MESA?”​

An Emerging Indo-Pacific Infrastructure StrategyBy Roland Rajah, the interpreter: “When set against potentially upwards of U.S.$1 trillion in financing for China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – to which the new U.S. fund is a thinly veiled response – that certainly seems the case. Yet the outlines of an Indo-Pacific infrastructure strategy that looks potentially more promising can also be seen.”​

Scott D. McDonald writes: Hesitancy among Indo-Pacific leaders is understandable. [...]Regional leaders continue to fear the United States is not wholly committed to a role in the Indo-Pacific region, subject to strategic distraction at the next crisis, and incapable of building an architecture that will maintain stability in the face of rising tensions. - The National Interest

Defence Innovation Is Critical for the Future of the Australia–U.S. Alliance By Daniel Kliman & Brendan Thomas-Noone, The Strategist (ASPI): “On the defence collaboration front, a new agreement was signed to jointly develop, research and test new cyber capabilities. Hypersonics were singled out as an area where cooperation between the two countries should be strengthened, particularly on concept development, testing and ‘validation’ of high-speed flight technologies.”​

Karl Hendler writes: Xi and Pompeo offer two different visions of the future for the Asia/Indo-Pacific. They ostensibly espouse many of the same values and goals but originate from opposite perspectives about which country should take a leading role. China has a head start, having already made massive investments in Asia and Africa. - Center for Strategic and International Studies

AI Will Change the Balance of Power By John Allen & Amir Husain, Proceedings Magazine: “...we will find that AI combined with myriad exponential technologies will carry us inexorably toward a different form of warfare that will unfold at speeds we cannot fully anticipate—a form of warfare we call hyperwar.”​

Is Turkey No Longer Part Of The West?by Paul Rahe via StrategikaAlmost a century has passed since the Ottoman Empire was dismembered and Mustafa Kemal set out to build the modern Turkish state on its ruins. Twenty years ago, no one in the West would have called into question the achievement of the man who eventually, with considerable justice, styled himself Atatürk (“Father of the Turks”). But many now fear that the political and cultural revolution he instigated in the 1920s will be overturned and that Turkey will cease to function as normal nation state, turn on the West, and try to upend the existing order in the eastern Mediterranean, the Balkans, and the Middle East.

Strategy and the Sea: Essays in Honour of John B. Hattendorf By John T. Kuehn, Strategy Bridge: “The anthology is reminiscent of a famous earlier effort for British naval historian Arthur Marder and perhaps attempts to be an updated version of sorts for a new generation, a way of chronicling how the bat has passed across the Atlantic.”

The Return of the Asia-Pacific Quad By Jeff Smith, The National Interest: ““A great deal of ink has been spilled dissecting the failure of the first QSD but its great flaw wasn’t its underlying purpose, agenda, or membership; it was its timing. In 2007 Beijing was still effectively marketing a soft power offensive while the four democracies struggled to reach internal and external consensus on the nature of the challenge China was posing and the appropriate response.””

Is India the Weakest Link in the Quad? By Derek Grossman, RAND: “Since the Trump administration's announcement that it seeks a “free and open” Indo-Pacific, observers have spilled much ink on the revival of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, to achieve this objective.”

Ham and Eggs: Who’s Really Committed in the Indo-Pacific?By John Powers, The Strategist (ASPI): “When you order ham and eggs, you can be sure the pig is committed. The chook, well, it’s interested, but not like that pig. The same could be said about the Pacific region. By specifically calling out the Indo-Pacific geographic seam, Mattis is keen to show U.S. allies, and potential peer competitors, that despite the White House’s ‘America First’ rhetoric, the Defense Department will maintain its relationships and presence in the region.”

The Unrealized Value of Open Source Intelligence for Irregular Warfare By Riley Murray, Strategy Bridge: “It can also be used to build an intelligence picture of a target before combining this information with other assets, especially since open source intelligence can provide information and cueing well before many other sources at a relatively low cost and risk.”​